Skip Navigation
/sebin/h/i/page-bg-internal.jpg
/sebin/l/u/page-banner-architecture-Penn-State.jpg
MTE-P

Clinical Experiences RAC

Problem Addressed

Teacher preparation programs face significant challenges in providing secondary mathematics teacher candidates with quality clinical experiences.  The problem is two-fold:

1.      There is an inadequate supply of quality mentor teachers to oversee the experiences. This is related to the quantity of teachers who are well versed in implementing the CCSS, especially embedding the standards for mathematical practice into their teaching of content standards on a daily basis.

2.      There needs to exist a bidirectional relationship between the teacher preparation programs and school partners in which clinical experiences take place. This relationship should reflect a common vision and shared commitment to the vision of CCSSM and other issues related to mathematics teaching and learning.

The work of Clinical Experience RAC encompasses a number of the principles and principle indicators from the MTE-Partnership Guiding Principles, including fostering partnerships between institutions of higher education, schools and districts, and other stakeholders such as state departments of education and is focused on preparing teacher candidates who promote student success in mathematics, as described in the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics (CCSS-M) and other college- and career-ready standards. In this RAC higher education faculty and partnering school districts and schools work together to actively recruit, develop, and support inservice master secondary mathematics teachers who can serve as mentors across the teacher development continuum from preservice to beginning teachers. Moreover, the clinical experiences RAC helps to ensure that teacher candidates have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions needed to implement educational practices found to be effective in supporting all secondary students’ success in mathematics as defined in the CCSS-M and other college- and career-ready standards.

General Approach

  • The RAC is divided into three Sub-RACs based on the three types of field experiences that we are implementing to meet the goals that we set forth in our primary drivers and our aim statement.
  • Each Sub-RAC is implementing PDSA cycles based on their goals and objectives.
  • Teams work together via conference calls, email, and the Trellis platform.
  • We utilize Dropbox as a way of sharing files and materials.
  • Have had face-to-face meetings as a whole RAC with breakout meetings for Sub-RACs.
  • There are overlap areas that focus the RAC as a whole, such as the emphasis on NCTM’s mathematics teaching practices, PD for mentors around the CCSS and mentoring mathematics teacher candidates, and outcome measures.
  • There are also specific goals to be attained within each of the Sub-RACs.
  • Each Sub-RAC has specific research questions, which they are addressing.

Who We Are

MethodsPaired PlacementCo-Plan/Co-Teach

University of North Dakota:

  • Michele Iiams
  • Cathy Williams

USC Midlands:

  • Jan Yow
  • DeVonne Smalls
  • Beth Oliver
  • Nevermind Chigoba

West Alabama Partnership, University of Alabama:

  • Jeremy Zelkowski
  • Jim Gleason
  • John Abby Khalilian
  • Karla Moore
  • Jill England
  • Melinda Williams

GSU:

  • Gregory Chamblee
  • Missy Jenkins
  • Sharon Taylors
  • Pier A. Junor Clarke

California State University, Fullerton:

  • Mark Ellis

California State University, Northridge:

  • Ivan Cheng

California State University, San Bernardino:

  • Su Liang

Oregon:

  • Rebekah Elliott
  • Wendy Aaron

Central Alabama:

  • Marilyn Strutchens
  • Brooke Barron
  • Peggy Dagley
  • Huajun Huang

Montana:

  • David Erickson
  • Bill Lowney
  • Lee Brown
  • Jim Hirstein

East Central Texas:

  • Jennifer Whitfield
  • Dawn Parker
  • Laura Wilding

New Mexico State University:

  • Lida J. Uribe-Flórez
  • Ted Stanford
  • Silvia Celedón-Pattichis
  • Tom Gruszka

Tampa Bay Area:

  • Ruthmae Sears
  • Fernando Burgos
  • Gladis Kersaint
  • Julie Wagner

North Carolina State University:

  • Karen Keene
  • Karen Norwood
  • Allison McCulloch
  • Karen Hollebrands

East Carolina University:

  • Charity Cayton
  • Maureen Grady
  • Ron Preston
  • Rose Sinicrope

UCF:

  • Janet Andreasen
  • Melissa Dagley
  • Amanda Ellis
  • Bryan Zugelder

California State University, Chico:

  • Jennifer Oloff-Lewis
  • Mary-Elizabeth Matthews
  • Kerrie Girt

California State University, San Bernardino:

  • Catherine Spencer

California State University, Northridge:

  • Ivan Cheng
  • Julie Gainsburg

California State University, Sacramento:

  • Stephanie Biagetti
  • Elaine Kasimatis

OSU:

  • Patti Brosnan
  • Marguerethe Jaede


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Current Progress

RAC Activities

  • In March 2015 we submitted a Phase 4, Robert Noyce Research Grant to the National Science Foundation. While not recommended for funding, we plan to revise and resubmit for the 2016 Noyce competition.
  • Sub-RAC leaders attended the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching Networked Improvement Community Design Learning Lab in spring and fall 2015.
  • We are disseminating our work through conference venues, such as AMTE’s Annual Meeting and SMTI’s Annual Meeting.
  • Some of our members will be presenting their work at the 13th International Congress on Mathematical Education (ICME-13), July 24 – 31, 2016 in Hamburg.

Early Field Experiences within Methods Sub-RAC

  • Teams revised and implemented a module designed to strengthen teacher candidates’ and their mentor teachers’ understanding of the CCSS Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP). The opportunity to build a productive teacher candidate and mentor teacher relationship is an additional goal. In addition to increasing teacher candidates’ and mentor teachers’ knowledge of the SMP the module provides an opportunity for the teacher candidates and mentor teachers to develop a relationship and common language around these ideas.
  • Teams developed a survey to measure the possible effects of completing the module activities on teacher candidates’ and mentor teachers’ understanding of the SMP.
  • Teams developed and employed additional measures for the SMP Module: Activity “Exit Slips” for teacher candidates and an implementation survey completed by the methods instructor.
  • Teams created and are piloting a survey on teacher candidates’ knowledge and use of the Mathematics Teaching Practices.

Co-Plan/ Co-Teach Sub-RAC

  • Teams created instruments and professional development training module relevant to CPCT, and received feedback from all members of the group.
  • During the 2014-2015 academic year, the CPCT Sub-RAC conducted a pilot study to examine mentor teachers’ and teacher candidates’ knowledge about the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics – Content Standards and Standards for Mathematical Practice, as well as documented their beliefs and instructional practices.
  • During 2015- 2016 academic year, the team revised the PDSA cycle for Cycle 2, and increased its membership.

Paired Placement Sub-RAC

  • Teams read about the model.
  • One team implemented the model fall 2013 and reported to the other teams about its findings.
  • The other two teams used this information along with information from the literature to prepare mentor teachers and candidates for the experience Spring 2014.
  • Teams also worked with their participants to adjust the model within their context.
  • Teams monitored the process throughout the semester.
  • Teams met via conference call to discuss the results of the implementations and what they would do differently.
  • Teams created professional development modules and measures fall 2014.
  • Teams implemented the model again Spring 2015 utilizing suggested improvements from previous iterations.
  • One pair was implemented in the fall of 2015 and six pairs are being implemented spring semester.

Opportunities for Engagement

Early Field Experiences within Methods Sub-RAC

1) Implementing SMP module and contributing to data collection; and

2) Collaborating on the development of additional modules and measures of module effects on teacher candidates and mentor teachers

Co-Plan/ Co-Teach Sub-RAC

1) Developing, utilizing, and sharing instruments used to measure the influence of the co-teaching model; and

2) Implementing and examining teacher candidates’ experiences throughout their field-based preparation (i.e., practicum and internship); and

3) Studying the influence of professional development on the success of the co-teaching model.

Paired Placement Sub-RAC

1) Developing, utilizing, and sharing instruments used to measure the influence of the paired placement model;

2) Implementing and examining teacher candidates experiences throughout their field-based preparation (i.e., practicum and internship); and

3) Refining and studying the influence of professional development and orientation sessions on the success of the paired placement model.